An Urbana pawn shop dealer was found guilty Friday of reckless
conduct in the February 2011 accidental discharge of a weapon at a gun
show in Bloomington.

Robert Rigdon, 74, of St. Joseph was accused
of failing to check the guns he brought to the sale from the Gold &
Diamond Exchange Pawn Shop Inc. to make certain they were not loaded. A
mini-14 semiautomatic rifle went off while a Washington man was holding
it, striking three others during the Egyptian Gun Collectors Show at the
former Bloomington Sale Barn.

The guilty verdict followed a bench
trial where the facts of the case were stipulated, meaning Rigdon made
no admission of guilt. He faces up to a year in jail, fines of $2,500 or
probation when he is sentenced July 5.

But, what does that mean for his gun rights? In the state of Indiana, aren't these things routinely bargained down to a point at which gun rights are retained, in spite of the fact that the guy has proven himself to be a danger?

Maybe this flaky bench trial in which he makes "no admission of guilt" is designed for that very purpose.

In a slap at gun-rights advocates, the Mexican ambassador to the U.S.
dismissed accusations that Mexico is seeking to undermine the Second
Amendment in order to curb the influx of U.S.-purchased guns.

"There is an 'urban myth' out there that somehow the Mexican
government is seeking to lobby against and destroy the rights
enshrined in the Second Amendment," said Ambassador Arturo Sarukhan. "This is gobbledygook."

The rest of the article is just more of what we've heard over and over again. I just wanted to get that quote in there.

What do you think? Is "gobbledygook," a good word to describe this and some of the other pro-gun myths? I think so.

A former Clark County sheriff's deputy on Thursday filed a wrongful
termination lawsuit against the county. Ed Owens alleges he was fired
for questioning the safety of gun safes issued by the sheriff's office
after his 3-year-old son got into a safe and accidentally shot himself.

Owens was fired Nov. 29, 2011, over violations relating to the accidental fatal shooting of his 3-year-old son, Ryan.

Owens is now seeking reinstatement to the sheriff's office and monetary compensation for lost wages and damage to his reputation.

He claims the safe was defective and his bosses should have warned him. That's how the 3-year-old was able to access the gun.

Everyone agrees criminals should not have guns. Yet, the reality seems to be that they have practically unlimited access to them. It would be better for everyone if somehow we could deny them access. But how?

First we need to identify the ways in which they currently do come into possession of weapons. We'll eliminate one common fallacy right away, that criminals get guns from other criminals. This may be true as far as it goes, but it doesn't help us in our analysis. We're interested in the original source of guns that are used in crime. If, for example, a gun is stolen during a burglary and passed from criminal to criminal before being used in a murder, that gun came from "Theft," which is one of our main categories.

The entire exercise is based on the presumption that nearly all guns start out as the lawful property of someone. The exceptions to this, home-made weapons and those imported from overseas, are insignificant in number. Our interest is the exact point at which a gun passes from lawful ownership into criminal hands.

The four categories are these.

1. Straw purchases. Gun traffickers recruit people with clean records who, depending on the state in which they live, can buy numerous guns and turn them over immediately to their criminal bosses. Other straw purchasers are of the amateur kind, the one-off kind, but regardless of the type there is a solution.

2. Theft. Most of this is done in private homes one gun at a time, or if the thieves are lucky several guns. For this there is an obvious solution. Other theft is done at military armories, gun manufacturers and gun shops, all of which require some failure on the part of the lawful custodian of the weapons.

3. Private sales. This is the one often referred to as the "gun show loophole." The reality is that private sales of guns account for about 40% of all gun sales and do not require a background check. The solution.

4. Lawful gun owners who turn bad. Many of these guys are what I call "hidden criminals." These are the ones who engage in unlawful activity but have never sustained a disqualifying felony. They buy and own guns legally just like your truly lawful gun owners. Others are upstanding members of society right up until the point they lose it and either kill the wife with a gun or shoot up the work place. We read about them every day. Some of them could be identified through drug testing, others by improved mental health background checks.

The four categories are listed in descending order, the most easily addressed to the most difficult. Straw purchasing could be practically eradicated with the solution I've outlined, while lawful gun owners who turn bad is much harder to address.

But, although gun-rights folks keep saying we have onerous gun control laws which infringe upon their rights, the truth is we have done very little to curtail the terrible problem of gun flow from the good guys to the bad guys.

Investigators have no clear idea of what led a man to go on a shooting
rampage on the northeast side of Indianapolis, leaving one victim and
himself dead and three other people wounded, but the police chief said
prior mental health issues might have contributed.

The article said the guy had issues. He had a gun too.

What's your opinion? Don't you think we should make more of an effort to keep guns out of the hands of guys like this?

Boxer Floyd Mayweather Jr. is about begin a three-month jail sentence in Las Vegas in a domestic violence case.

The case stems from a hair-pulling, arm-twisting attack on the mother of three of his children in September 2010.

Mayweather pleaded guilty last December to reduced charges in the altercation with Josie Harris while their two sons watched.

What's your opinion? Do you think Mayweather lost his gun rights over this? Do you think he should?

Domestic abusers, who plea bargain their offense down, like Floyd Mayweather did, often retain their right to own guns. Depending on the State, there are many violent and dangerous people who can still own and use guns legally.

A 34-year-old Minneapolis man has been charged in connection with a
recent incident where, without warning, he attacked another man and
stole a gun that the victim had a permit for, according to police.

Willie Merriweather was charged with first-degree aggravated robbery
in connection with the May 21 incident.

Police said an adult male was
walking home in the area when a man, later identified as Merriweather,
was walking the other way and suddenly slammed the victim into a parked
car.

The victim hurt his arm and wasn’t able to defend himself.
Merriweather allegedly searched the victim, eventually finding a pistol,
and put it to the victim’s head while demanding valuables.

The victim
lost the gun and his wallet during the attack, police said.

This story illustrates the silliness of situational awareness as a self-defense tool. The pro-gun fantasy-dwellers are always talking about it. They imagine themselves to be like Arnold in The Terminator, scanning the area for trouble before it even happens.

The truth is, sudden and unexpected attacks leave the concealed carry permit holder as unprepared as the proverbial hippie-chick, skipping down the street tripping on acid.

The down side is all these gun owners are adding to the problem. Their guns are sometimes stolen, surely more than we know about because no one would want to report such an embarrassing incident. Other times, because they think they're able to read situations so well, they come out with their gun unnecessarily. Many of these go unreported too, for obvious reasons.

And, of course we have the crimes committed by concealed carry holders, many of which go undetected as such, especially when the object of their attention flees or ends up dead.

What's your opinion? On the whole, does concealed carry do more good than harm? What do you think?

A Lodi storekeeper was arrested on Tuesday after shooting a man suspected of stealing beer from his shop.

Gurminder "Gary" Parmar shot 21-year-old Christopher Driggers in the upper shoulder area between his neck and shoulder after Driggers allegedly stole the beer.

Police were notified of the shooting around 9:49 p.m. by a customer who claimed they saw Driggers flee the shop on foot after the shooting. Officers responded to the scene and soon located Driggers and the beer.

Following an ensuing investigation of the incident, Parmar was arrested and charged with Assault with a Deadly Weapon.

In California, a person is allowed to use deadly force when their life or the life of someone around them is "immediately threatened." Since Driggers never had a weapon or made any type of threat towards Parmar, the shopkeeper was not permitted to use deadly force.

In California they know how to sniff out those fake DGUs. Of course it helps when the victim is still alive. This incident has a little bit of that vigilante flavor to it, don't you think? It's got that typical attitude of righteous gun owners towards criminals, even petty ones.

An interesting thing about this story is the look of the shopkeeper. If you listen to our gun-rights friends you wouldn't think a guy like that could own a gun legally. According to them, you have to be rich and famous, or at least white.

Police say a man suspected of multiple shootings in Seattle shot himself on Wednesday as officers closed in.
The Seattle Times identified the suspect as Ian Lee Stawicki, a 40-year-old Seattle resident.

His brother, Andrew Stawicki, said, "It's no surprise to me this happened. We could see this coming. Nothing good is going to come with that much anger inside of you."

Officers believe Stawicki was responsible for killing four people: three at a Seattle cafe, and one at a downtown parking lot as part of a carjacking. He is listed in critical condition at an area medical center.

What's your opinion? Is this period of violence in an otherwise tranquil city just an anomaly? Or is this what we can expect to see more of?

Okay, so, there's a new study out that listed the most violent and least violent states in the US. The study by the Institute for Economics and Peace assessed
factors such as number of homicides and violent crimes, the
incarceration rate, the number of police, and the availability of small
arms. The study also concluded the following:

"The
2012 United States Peace Index (USPI) has found that the U.S. is more
peaceful now than at any other time over the last twenty years."

Okay, that's great news! According to its authors, the study "is the
only statistical analysis of crime, and the cost of crime, in all 50
states," including the 61 most populous metropolitan areas, and concluded the following:

Maine is the most peaceful state for the 11th consecutive year; Louisiana is the least peaceful state.

Wyoming has improved the most while Arizona records the biggest fall.

The Cambridge metro area is the most peaceful, while Detroit is the least.

Further improvements in peacefulness would generate hundreds of billions in extra economic activity.

Fascinating information, what kind of connections can you draw from this?

“When you have children, when you have firearms in the house, I think
you just need to exercise common sense,” said Knox County Sheriff David
Barber.

Many sheriff's offices, including the Knox County Sheriff’s Office offer cable-type gun locks for free to anyone who wants them.

Johnstown police Lt. Josh Boudinot said they can also be found in almost every gun store for $5 to $10.

While Boudinot said that's the best way to keep a gun from
accidentally firing, something as simple as a zip-tie will also do the
job.

“Basically, all you do is just run it up through the magazine well,
out the top, loop it through there, and there you go,” said Lt.
Boudinot, demonstrating how to secure a handgun.

He said the zip-tie prevents someone from putting a magazine or ammunition into the gun.

“It's not as good as a gun lock of course, but it's something. Something's better than nothing," he said.

Now, let me guess. I know the contentious, never-give-an-inch gun guys will have a problem with this. What could it be?

I know, it'll take too long to bring the gun into use in case of need. Removing the lock or the zip-tie is just too time consuming when you've got rapists and murderers kicking in the front door.

Is that a valid argument? Let's see. If half the accidental shooting deaths are kids getting ahold of daddy's gun, that would be about 300 lives saved. That's if everyone used gun locks. Do you think 300 lives would be lost due to the couple-second delay required to make the gun available in case of an emergency?

No, I don't think even our most argumentative gun-rights friends would say that.

So, we're all agreed. Let's make proper gun storage mandatory. If a kid gets hurt with a gun that was not properly secured, the gun owner is held responsible, minimum punishment is loss of gun rights. Fair enough?

Police said a man and his stepdaughter are dead after what they have determined was a murder-suicide.

The Baton Rouge Police Department identified the victims as David Robinson, 57, and his stepdaughter, Reagan Rowe, 26.

Detectives said Robinson was arguing with his wife about them getting a divorce.

They said when he tried to use the computer he realized Rowe had changed the password, so he couldn't unlock it.

Investigators reported Robinson then grabbed a gun, shot Rowe and turned the gun on himself. They were both pronounced dead at the scene.

What's your opinion? Does it sound like another lawful gun owner gone bad? It seems so to me. This is an aspect of gun ownership that many people aren't aware of or don't want to admit. Among the huge group called "lawful gun owners" there are many who are not fit to own guns responsibly. These are the ones we read about in the news every day. There's a continual flow from the group called "good guys" to the group called "bad guys." And immediately after, the rest of the "good guys" disown the miscreant. He has nothing to do with them.

A three-year-old boy died Tuesday morning at Akron Children’s
Hospital following an accidental shooting at his home Monday evening.

According
to Knox County Sheriff David Barber, a 911 call was received at the
sheriff’s office at 6:04 p.m. Monday reporting that a three-year-old boy
had shot himself in the head with a handgun.

Barber called his death an unfortunate accident.

Capt. David Shaffer stated in a news release that a 45-caliber handgun was
involved in the shooting. It was recovered at the residence. Shaffer
said the investigation is continuing as detectives have yet to interview
the child’s parents.

What's your opinion? Do you think it's accurate to call something like this "an unfortunate accident?" Doesn't that imply that bad luck had something to do with it? Doesn't that downplay the negligence of the gun owner who left the gun within reach of the kid?

58-year-old Irvin Bivens was struck in the stomach last Saturday when someone opened fire outside his home.
Police now say they think his murder is connected to a shooting at a convenience store the same night.

Incidents like this are happening in every city every day. They are a direct result of the lax or non-existent gun laws, which ensure that young criminals will always have all the guns they need. It is a side-effect of what the gun-rights folks call freedom.

U.S. Marines at Camp Lejeune, N.C., stole and sold approximately $2 million in guns and combat equipment to streets gangs and to China and Russia, military officials confirmed. The stolen guns and combat gear included assault rifles, night-vision goggles and flashlights.

More than 60 people have been implicated in the incident, the Daily News in Jacksonville, N.C.,
reported. 47 service members and 21 civilians have been charged so far.
Several of them have already pleaded guilty, Ed Buice, public affairs
officer for Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) in Quantico,
Va., told the paper.

It seems like there's a lot more to "theft," as one of the main sources of guns going to criminals than your proverbial revolver being stolen out of the night stand or glove box. This is theft on an entirely different level.

Although the case is ongoing, what do you think about the sentences already handed down?

That paper said that two Marines have been convicted in the case.
They are Sgt. Daniel Adam Reich and Capt. Donald E. Pump Jr. Reich was
convicted Monday of selling and attempting to sell military property and
conspiracy. He was sentenced to 40 months in prison and given a
dishonorable discharge.

Pump was convicted of similar offenses, sentenced to 18 months in prison and dismissed from the Corps.

Do those sentences seem a bit light to you? I would have expected a harsher treatment of Marines involved in something like this.

In Prince George’s County — where hundreds of people were shot last
year and 64 of them died — people convicted of gun crimes may soon be
required to register, regularly check in with police and submit to home
visits from officers.

All nine members of the County Council have signed on as
co-sponsors of a bill requiring the registry, and a vote is expected in
early June. The effort to make the county’s streets safer has been
pushed by the police, who say that for too many people, carrying a
firearm illegally is a rite of passage and getting caught is a minor
inconvenience.

What's your opinion? Is there anything wrong with registering gun offenders in this way? Shouldn't the police have all the tools possible at their disposal?

A little before 1:30 p.m., other shooters at the firing range saw Wells fall to the ground. He was discovered dead from a single gunshot to the head.
Police called to the scene said a suicide note was found in Wells’ pocket. The case is being ruled a suicide, Adams said.

What's your opinion? Is the easy rental of handguns contributing to this problem? Should there be better screening before allowing someone to use a rental gun?

Do you think this was one of those "determined" suicides? He wrote a note, went to the range, rented a gun and then blew his brains out. It would be hard to deter a guy like that, wouldn't it?

But most suicides aren't committed by such determined individuals. Evan at gun ranges, when someone goes there depressed and angry in order to do the deed, they aren't entirely committed.

According
to arrest papers, police from Plymouth, Larksville and Edwardsville
went to a home on Aben Lane around 2:45 a.m. where Maria Villano said
Drury was pointing a handgun at her. While on her cellphone with Luzerne
County 911, Villano said Drury was running towards his home on Downing
Street.

Officers found Drury sitting on a couch in his house. He
was arrested without incident, telling police the gun was on the night
stand in his bedroom. Police found a holstered 9-millimeter Highpoint
Model C9 gun that was loaded but didn't have a bullet in the chamber.

It's a safe bet that he was a lawful gun owner because the charges did not include illegal possession of a gun or anything like that. It's only a slightly bigger leap to consider the possibility that he also held a concealed carry permit, this being Pennsylvania and all.

Whenever the crime is one of domestic violence, in which the CCW permit plays no part, it is often overlooked in the reporting. And to the great enjoyment of the gun-rights advocates who love to boast about how responsible and safe they are, these concealed carry permit holders who switch sides by committing a crime go undetected as such. They look just like all the other formerly lawful gun owners who become criminals.

The report said traffic deaths fell 43 percent between 1966 and 2000
because of "the combined efforts of government and advocacy
organizations." It argued that gun deaths would also fall if firearms
were subject to federal health and safety regulations like other
consumer goods are.

Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence,
cited speed limits, licensing of drivers and laws against drinking and
driving as examples of government regulations that make it safer to use a
motor vehicle.

While traffic deaths have fallen nationwide, gun deaths have been
largely unchanged. If the trend continues, the report said, firearm
fatalities could exceed motor vehicle deaths nationally unless there is
further federal regulation.

For me the best example is the seat-belt law. People didn't like it, but it saves lives. In the same way, proper gun control laws would save lives.

Delmarva Now reports on the latest craze in criminal carry. Concealing a real gun inside a toy guy is pretty ingenious. Of course now that the cops are catching on to it, there'll certainly be more incidents.

"If you see a kid in a bathing suit who's running down the street
carrying one of those he's likely not converted it," Shipley said. "If
you see a guy while responding to a bank for an alarm, it's important to
know he may have converted it from a water gun."

Shipley said situations like this are "just another example of why it's tough to be a police officer."

What's your opinion? When I said "ban them sumbitches," I was referring to the realistic looking guns that can easily be mistaken for the real thing. What do we do about these?

On New Trajectory, Baldr wrote a touching piece about remembering our fallen military. His conclusion:

But let us remember, that although we rightly show concern
for those who are dying (or surviving) in distant wars, we should also note
that far, far more people are dying from gunfire here on our own soil. People don't like to think about it that
way. They don't want to believe that our
nation is warring against gun violence here.
But at 100,000 shootings a year in the U.S., we can't afford to cover
our eyes and pretend that all is right.

Police say Ripple entered the bedroom of a
house at 425 College Ave. at 3:30 a.m. Wednesday. The screen door was
closed, but unlocked.

The owners of the house, identified by
county property records as Timothy Justice and Doreen Orion, were in bed
when they heard Ripple come in. In the darkness, they shouted to warn
the intruder to leave and that they had a gun, but Ripple continued
walking through the bedroom, and Justice fired one shot, police said.

When
the homeowners turned on the lights, they saw Ripple on the floor with a
gunshot wound to her hip and called 911, police said. They said they
did not recognize her as anyone they knew.

Additional justification of the shooting is that the wife of the shooter had been stalked by a schizophrenic woman in the past. But now they leave the door of their multi-million-dollar home unlocked.

To add insult to injury, Ms. Ripple is now being charged with trespassing.

My biggest problem with this case is not that the home owner, who is perfectly willing to shoot someone, does not even lock his front door, but that he could not possibly have had a reasonable fear that he was faced with lethal threat. Plus, he violated Rule number 3.

Four people are dead and at least 28 others were wounded in weekend
shootings across the city since Friday afternoon, including a 7-year-old
girl shot while playing in front of her South Side home.

You know what the gun-rights advocates say? They say either this is the fault of gun control laws, because in Chicago the good guys can't protect themselves, or they say it has nothing to do with guns one way or another, it's all about social and cultural problems, drugs and gangs, and all that.

The one thing they won't accept is the part gun availability plays in this violence. They don't like to be reminded that the 30 plus guns used in this weekend violence all came from legitimate gun owners. The problem is gun flow, and gun-rights people and gun owners in general are responsible for that.

I say that because the three main sources of guns flowing into the criminal world, straw purchasing, private sales and theft, could all be diminished or nearly eradicated. You know who's standing in the way of that, right?

One man
was shot to death by Miami police, and another man is fighting for his
life after he was attacked, and his face allegedly half eaten, by a
naked man on the MacArthur Causeway off ramp Saturday, police said.

I'm the first one to criticize the police decision to shoot someone, but when it comes to a face-eater, I have no problem with the shooting. The only part of the article I wondered about was the possible explanation for the incident.

Police theorize the attacker might have been suffering from "cocaine
psychosis," a drug-induced craze that bakes the body internally and
often leads the affected to strip naked to try and cool off.

That theory explaining why a crazy guy gets naked is pretty far fetched, and certainly doesn't explain his appetite, unless wait a minute, unless he was also on medical marijuana.

Most stand-your-ground laws grant a person who
uses deadly force the presumption that he acted reasonably unless there
is evidence to the contrary.

If there are no
witnesses and the victim is dead, or if the evidence is conflicting, the
chances are greater that someone can "get away with murder," Savannah
Law School professor Elizabeth Megale.

"The
statute can be used and distorted by hard-core criminals or someone who
has committed a crime," she says. "Most times, someone will get arrested
if the other person does not die. … It's ironic. If someone dies, the
other person is less likely to get arrested."

What's your opinion? Hasn't the macho, tough-guy, never-backing-down attitude about gun ownership gone too far? People are being shot and killed who wouldn't be otherwise. Homeowners who open the door to screaming maniacs and then shoot them dead are in the wrong. Armed citizens who get in arguments with unarmed people and then shoot them dead are in the wrong.

Avoiding the incident should be a requirement. If you fail to take simple steps to avoid the confrontation, you shouldn't be able to claim self-defense later.

This was a gun owner with one notch on his belt already. Having a gun in hand, secure in the knowledge that he is the king of his castle, HE OPENED THE DOOR TO THE SCREAMING DRUNK MANIAC.
That was his mistake.

To many gun owners, it would have been acting like a punk, or giving into the bad guys, to call 911 and wait. The macho arrogance of gun-rights advocates says that rather than do that, it's better to shoot and kill an offender, even one who is obviously not in his right mind.

What's your opinion? Can an incident that was avoidable be considered a legitimate DGU? If the gun owners makes certain decisions that are wrong but not criminal, and it results in a shooting death, can that incident be considered legit?

Sunday, May 27, 2012

How is it possible that Penn Jillette never tried pot or, even more difficult to believe, never had a sip of alcohol? To me that sounds even more bizarre than Obama admitting what he did in the book or Clinton's famous "didn't inhale" remark.

Other than that, I'm in total agreement with releasing the folks in jail for pot.

Link provided by Thomas our commenter. I say the store clerk should have given the thieves the money. He probably wouldn't have been beat up and he definitely wouldn't have killed them. Here's the link.

On New Trajectory, Baldr has compiled a list of modern militia incidents we should all be concerned about.

But as we consider our patriotism, think for a moment
about those who espouse a more violent interpretation of what it means to be
patriotic. In particular, so-called
"citizen militias." They like
to pass themselves off as average citizens who are concerned with helping to
protect their communities. In reality
they are gun nuts who, if you visit their websites, are insurrectionist
anti-government types who stockpile weapons, play soldierin the
woods, and often have racist
views, hiding their extremist views behind a radical interpretation of the Second
Amendment and glorification of a slanted interpretation of Revolutionary War history. It is an insurrectionist philosophy which
the NRA actively supports. Sadly,
these philosophies attract people who are violent and sometimes terroristic,
often with tragic consequences.

The list, which may not be comprehensive, is frightening. I think the description of them as"hiding their extremist views behind a radical interpretation of the Second
Amendment and glorification of a slanted interpretation of Revolutionary War history" is exactly right.

I’m a hunter, and I know that hunters need a spokesperson. We need
someone with a lifetime of experience who speaks with authority about
preserving public lands and the wild animals living there that we love
to hunt. We need someone whose personal magnetism generates interest
simply by speaking on the subject of hunting.

I just don’t want my spokesman to be Ted Nugent.

***********

It also bothers me that Nugent is on the board of directors of the
National Rifle Association. The NRA, which protects our right to bear
arms, also claims to represent hunters. As such, their directors should
be held to the highest standard of hunting behavior. It will be
interesting to see if the law-abiding, ultra-patriotic NRA will do the
right thing and remove Nugent from their board.

Or will the NRA
leadership continue to support a twice-convicted game-law violator who
openly threatens the president of the United States?

What do you think? Is this guy representative of the hunting community? I would think so.

The Louisiana constitution currently grants each citizen the right to
keep and bear arms and provides that "this right shall not be
abridged." But it also has a provision allowing the "passage of laws to
prohibit the carrying of weapons concealed on the person."

The
proposed constitutional amendment removes the language allowing laws to
prohibit concealed weapons in certain places and provides that the right
to keep and bear arms is "fundamental and shall not be infringed." It
also imposes a higher standard of proof -- "strict scrutiny" -- for
determining the constitutionality of any law or any individual effort to
restrict gun ownership and carrying guns.

Does it boil down to the elimination of gun free zones? Or is there more to it? Does this new law allow for Constitutional Carry too?

Lining up public officials in support of legislation is standard fare for interest groups advancing their agenda on Capitol Hill. But the letter
signed by 23 state Attorneys General in support of the National Rifle
Association's bill to nationalize concealed carry of handguns suggests
that, for those public officials, pandering to the gun lobby is far more
important than doing the job they were sworn to perform.

Call me naïve, but I had always thought that a State Attorney General
had a solemn duty to enforce the laws of his/her state. Apparently some Attorneys General recognize a "gun law" exception to that obligation.

The incident began shortly before midnight when two officers
responded to reports that a man had pulled a gun on a cabbie and his
passenger, as well as a woman walking on the street, near the corner of
Sonoma Boulevard and Carolina Street, said police Lt. Lee Horton.

The law's strongest support comes from the state's most-rural and
conservative areas, North Florida and the Panhandle, where 65 percent
favor "stand your ground" and 30 percent oppose it. The least support
was in liberal South Florida, Trayvon's home, where 46 percent favor it
and 44 percent oppose it.

Generally, when it comes to gun control, the poll shows 51 percent
oppose stricter laws and 45 percent favor them. A narrower segment of
the electorate, 49 percent, say Tampa should be allowed to temporarily
ban guns during the RNC convention while 46 favor the idea. Voters from
the Tampa Bay region are the most-inclined to favor the temporary RNC
ban.

According to the Birmingham Police Department, 27-year-old David Winston was shot dead last night at the Inn Town Suites, off Huffman
Road in Huffman.

The incident happened at 11:30 p.m. Officers say Winston had been shot several times, and died at the scene. A woman found at the hotel had also been shot, but is expected to recover.

Police have arrested a security guard who works at the hotel.

Would it be too much of a leap to say this was a lawful gun owner gone wrong? Could be be so bold as to assume he probably had a concealed carry permit?

It's too easy to say the "vast majority" of gun owners are safe and responsible. Those who are not are in the news every single day, day in and day out. And the sad part is much of this could be avoided with little or no cost to the truly law-abiding.